Re:We have a new biggest douche in the universe!

Shirley strikes me as a classic "I-got-a-public-forum-with-no-writing-experience" kind of guy. At times he can be truly funny and insightful, but he just hasn't developed the filter that writers need to have. And now, it looks like he won't get the chance.

We all have opinions that are unpopular or politically incorrect, but you can be damn sure that if I was given the opportunity to leapfrog tens of thousands of more qualified applicants to write a blog on one of the world's most popular websites, I'd keep those opinions to myself unless absolutely necessary.

It's a real shame, because Shirley had a lot of talent and seemed like a nice guy, but I doubt if he'll ever get a shot at anything beyond a local newspaper/tv station again.

John Edwards I know/heard of....but who the hell is Paul Shirley? A quick search informed me. Must be a Republican and definitely similar on the idiot meter as Pat Robertson. He probably had similar feelings for the people hurt by Katrina and blames the plight of those in Darfur or Rwanda entirely on the inability of ORDINARY citizenry affected drastically by a natural or man made disaster to help themselves. The ahole probably has no idea about the historical and political (dictatorship) misfortunes in Haiti's past which play such a great part in the sad facts about the societal and economic conditions there in the last century.

To blame the lack of infrastructure and economic plight of poor and ordinary Haitians is utterly illiterate and above all black-hearted (no pun intended). ESPN should have also fired the editor who allowed such private opinion to be published.

CTC: Haiti was able to raise $38,000 for the U.S. after Kartrina. A microscopic amount by our standards, but try to put that in perspective.

SAG: Allowing for relative differences in GNP and population, that would be like the US donating $383 million. Awesome.

@ws511 Theres a way to say "there's a lot more disasters destroying Haiti than just the natural ones, and carelessly throwing money at the problem because it makes YOU feel good is not the proper long-term solution" without being a dick.

NewRapCity – I don’t disagree with that. And, I actually disagree with more of what Paul Shirley said than not. But … when people get fired for expressing opinions that are not popular – or expressing them in a way that some may object to – it makes me sit up and take notice. ESPN certainly has the right to hire and fire anyone for whatever reasons they may choose but I have the right to disagree with the message that their actions might tend to send. Political censure is a slippery slope and can end up being something we all regret approving of. As I see it, at least.

NewRapCity – … when people get fired for expressing opinions that are not popular – or expressing them in a way that some may object to – it makes me sit up and take notice. ESPN certainly has the right to hire and fire anyone for whatever reasons they may choose but I have the right to disagree with the message that their actions might tend to send. Political censure is a slippery slope and can end up being something we all regret approving of. As I see it, at least.

I'm the first person with you. I just can't believe this is political censure.

The article was not published on ESPN and its still available for everyone to view (or not) unedited. Shirley is a freelance writer who won't work again for ESPN, because they are Disney. They always send crazy messages and I support their right to do that.

WS511, with all respect, I believe you are conflating the right to free speech with Shirley's right to use the ESPN platform to espouse his particular views which apart from being morally repugnant and uninformed (to this reader) had nothing to do with sport.

Corporations as a rule are loath to be party to an event which alienates a significant portion of the potential client base (readership in this case). Its just bad for business. Witness the Tiger Woods fiasco or the Arenas case. Constitutional rights or even morality have nothing to do with the severing of the affiliation....just the business case.

Simply put, Shirley has every right to setup his own blog and write about all of his convictions just as Iam sure there are extremely fringe commentators who do....and no one would bother to shut him down and very few who would grace the site.

Shirley didn't use ESPN as a platform. He is associated with ESPN for many years of freelance writing for the site. The Haiti piece was an essay written for flipcollective.com (a division of flipmodesquad).

Bendit and NewRapCity - It’s almost a funny thing. (Funny in an obscenely curious kind of way.) I woke up this morning to find an email from a childhood pal from my hometown (Mtl.) who seems to make a portion of his living gambling and who regularly picks my brain on the Raptors … but this morning, he had forwarded a news story from a friend of his who’s from Haiti, that gives a first-hand account of some of the horrors that are now going on over there.

Very briefly: it tells of 5000 prisoners – many of them very dangerous – who escaped from a large prison in Haiti on the night of the earthquake and are now running wild, making an already horrendous situation more like the worst kind of nightmare one could almost imagine (this may have been reported on in local news, but it might be that I haven’t been paying enough attention) … and I thought of how I had somewhat cavalierly tossed off a crack about ‘book burning’ in regards to Mr. Shirley losing his job because of his stance on helping Haiti. Reading details about what is going on over there, I suddenly felt that … perhaps I don’t know what the hell I’m talking about.

So … while there’s a discussion here (on this thread) that I find interesting and had intended on adding to, regarding the ‘politics’ of the thing and some of the things that bother me over what’s happening in Haiti regarding how we’re going about helping … I no longer feel much of anything about that part of the subject at all. The simple fact is, they need help over there, terribly and desperately, in any way and every way that they can get it. I had looked forward to making some time this morning to address the discussion that began here yesterday, but to force along an ‘intellectual conversation’ about things that don’t really matter (anymore, in my own mind) would seem indecent and offensive somehow, to myself (at present) as well as many (I would guess) who are affected by what is going on there. The help that they need is urgent and the points I had intended on making suddenly seem trivial and unimportant. So … that’s all I really have and I thought I should say.

That was very close to the sentiments I had when I first heard about the Shirley reaction/story....a visceral reaction to why the man had to get all knotted up in the societal mores, culture and politics of the Haitian people when there was a natural disaster of epic proportions that had taken place and many there in terrible pain of many kinds who just needed help....not the judgemental bon mots he was passing along. It seems he was right when he surmised he was in a "miniscule minority" when it came to giving as evidenced from all the support by so many.